• boethius
    2.4k
    boethius, everyone having followed already knows (re-repeating, again), in fact, extremism is a problem all over (e.g. † below), yet, again,jorndoe

    So we're back to the extremists (literal Nazi's) in Ukraine exist everywhere in the same amount?

    Please, explain how analogous extremists are of similar problem in Norway, Portugal, Costa Rica, and "all over"?

    Ukraine still isn't ruled by a Nazi regime; those claims are straight from the Kremlin's propaganda machine (don't echo them)
    [...]
    Apr 25, 2022 - Dec 20, 2022 - Aug 2, 2023
    Nov 28, 2023

    No where do I claim Ukraine is ruled by a Nazi regime.

    I explain they are obviously a problem. The position of "the problem of Nazi's in Ukraine" uses the word "problem". They cause problems.

    For example, (again before the Western media got the memo that Nazi's in Ukraine are alright):

    Commentary: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem
    As Ukraine's struggle against Russia and its proxies continues, Kiev must also contend with a growing problem behind the front lines: far-right vigilantes who are willing to use intimidation and even violence to advance their agendas, and who often do so with the tacit approval of law enforcement agencies.
    Commentary: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem

    Saying things like "oh there's extremists everywhere" is called trying to cover for these Nazis sympathizing with these Nazis.

    These Nazi's are obviously a problem. Claiming that extremism is some comparable problem everywhere (to therefore try to minimize its problem in Ukraine) is both a bold faced lie (you will not find similar extremism "everywhere", and where you do, such as the Middle East, it is also obviously a problem that likewise frustrates political process), obviously pro-Nazi, and also obviously the whataboutism fallacy (what about the extremists in New Zealand!!) but even worse simply skipping over the fact that where violent extremism is a problem (using violence and terror to affect the political process; aka. terrorism) you either have government doing its best to stop said extremists or then far bigger political problems if the extremists are in government.

    It's obviously a problem. "Far-right vigilantes who are willing to use intimidation and even violence to advance their agendas, and who often do so with the tacit approval of law enforcement agencies," is a problem. Murdering a negotiator during a negotiation is called using "intimidation and violence to advance their agenda" and obviously has tacit approval from law-enforcement as it is literally law enforcement.

    Now, even if you want to minimize the problem as you do, there's clearly plenty of visible evidence documented by Western media such as I posted, so, again, it is simply a bold faced lie to say the problem is Kremlin propaganda. Explain how all the reports I posted are Kremlin propaganda.

    Understanding that the underlying problem is obviously a problem and not propaganda, is perilous to ignore as it will lead to underestimating Russia's motivations.

    You can argue there wasn't "enough Nazis" in Ukraine to justify invasion in some absolute moral framework or whatever framework you like, be the first to actually provide a definition of "enough Nazis", but the strong presence of Nazis is still required to understand political process in Ukraine (that some respondents to a poll may feel intimidated into giving one answer over another, for example).

    But regardless if you actually present a just war argument for Ukraine after 536 pages of the discussion, it is an important fact in understanding the war that the Nazis in Ukraine will provide strong motivations for Russians (regardless if they really "rule" Ukraine or not, regardless of their total numbers and strength). That a completely factual based motivation can be further amplified by propaganda should simply increase our estimation of Russian will to fight. Assuming Russians had low morale and would just collapse any day, in the words of our precious NATO leader, turned out to be "underestimating" the Russians, which we should never do!

    Ignoring or minimizing the Nazis leads to false understanding the war and poor decision making.

    ... in fact, they've made progress (re-repeating), while their northern neighbor has regressed (re-rep...). The so-called deNazification of Ukraine is but another political tool borne of ulterior motives. A Nazi regime to join the EU? Nay, Kyiv just isn't that Nazi stronghold narrated by the Kremlin to be cleansed, get over it.

    † I'll just stick to links ...

    The US · WISN · Nov 18, 2023
    Germany · Bloomberg · Nov 5, 2023
    The US (military) · VICE · Oct 20, 2022
    Russia (military) · VICE · Aug 22, 2022
    The US / Online · NBC · Jan 8, 2021
    France · France 24 · Oct 29, 2020
    Sweden · euronews · Sep 30, 2017
    jorndoe

    First of all, the videos don't seem to support your point but rather support the point that violent extremism is a problem (except of course when it's "for democracy") whenever it frustrates legitimate political process.

    Second, as the videos I post demonstrate, there are clearly Nazis in Ukraine. The Nazis in Ukraine is borne from the Nazis in Ukraine. If Putin intended to invade Ukraine all along, then the West and Ukraine tolerating and arming and incorporating into government the Nazis in Ukraine simply provides Putin an amazingly good pretext for the invasion. If Putin did not plan to invade Ukraine all along but is reacting to security threats, Nazis in Ukraine growing in strength all the time is an obvious security threat.

    The Ukrainians have proven willing to change for the better, but not to be overrun by Russia just like that (again); the Kremlin has proven unwilling to change for the better, and continue to landgrab and bomb others in the name of their authoritarianism. (By the way, shouldn't someone have freed Ukraine from military-political covert invaders like Girkin? Shouldn't someone de-genocide the Uyghurs? Shouldn't someone clean up the Kremlin?)jorndoe

    What is the point you are trying to make? How did Ukrainians change for the better for example?
  • neomac
    1.4k
    If I remember correctly, the main counter argument was that "there are Nazi's everywhere" ... I ask from where else is there similar evidence of so many Nazi's causing such big problems ... nada.boethius


    Dude, I don’t even think you watch the videos you link (I checked 4 out of 5, since one wasn’t reachable). They too mention Neo-nazi and far right movements in Europe and the US committing brutal terrorist attacks. Neo-nazi are a Western issue, not specifically a Ukrainian issue.
    The question is not if the Ukrainian Neo-nazi are a problem (most certainly not in the way Putin presented it to justify his war, because “electorally they are very weak, all the far-right parties together couldn’t clear the very low bar to enter the Ukrainian parliament. In terms of mass support in Ukraine, they don’t have it”, as in one of your videos the reporter states it clearly and repeatedly). But that RUSSIA IS NO SOLUTION TO THE NAZI PROBLEM NOWHERE (INCLUDING RUSSIA). Russia is the BIGGEST EXPORTER OF FAR-RIGHT EXTREMISM:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Nazism_in_Russia
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managed_nationalism
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right_politics_in_Russia#Groups
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Utkin
    https://www.latrobe.edu.au/news/articles/2022/opinion/russias-long-history-of-neo-nazis
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/02/pro-kremlin-neo-nazi-militia-inciting-torture-murder-ukrainian-prisoners
    Besides, RUSSIA IS NO SOLUTION TO THE NAZI PROBLEM PARTICULARLY INSIDE UKRAINE because it’s Russia meddling in Ukraine and invasion that is nurturing particularly the Ukrainian neo-nazism (for historical reasons too).
    Considering military campus for children, let’s have a look at what Russia is doing: https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/children-as-a-tool-how-russia-militarizes-kids-in-the-donbas-and-crimea/
    This nationalist polarisation is very common phenomenon in countries struggling for their sovereignty (see also Israel vs Palestine).
  • neomac
    1.4k
    But it's good to know that the extent of the argument doesn't go beyond "Everyone who disagrees with me is a propagandist." :lol:Tzeentch

    As I said, many times, such accusations can be easily retorted. The sources we bring up which you disagree with are propaganda to you. However the deep issue behind this easy accusations probably concern our understanding on how propaganda works in general, how my arguments work in this thread, and our respective positions toward the US vs Russia. That's why I have no problem to qualify myself as pro-US while you seem to have problems to qualify yourself as pro-Russian.
  • Tzeentch
    3.8k
    That's why I have no problem to qualify myself as pro-US while you seem to have problems to qualify yourself as pro-Russian.neomac

    Yes, I do have a problem with that. I am trying to understand the conflict, not cheerleading for a side.
  • boethius
    2.4k
    That's why I have no problem to qualify myself as pro-US while you seem to have problems to qualify yourself as pro-Russian.neomac

    To add to reply, positions that get hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians killed and do not accomplish the war aims, is not pro-Ukrainian.

    It may simply be true that Ukraine has almost no chance of some sort of military victory, especially given NATO's policy at the start of the war of no heavy weapons ... which we're now told by pro-Ukrainians that:

    "You need heavy weapons to prevail in a high intensity conflict" and "breaking through a prepared, tiered defense will be difficult" is not exactly ground breaking stuff. Such analysis was widely available for anyone who cares to look.Echarmion

    Apparently now it's "not ground breaking stuff" and such "analysis was widely available" (even to NATO?), now that it's been proven to be obviously true.

    Yet I was accused of being a Putinist, repeating Russian propaganda etc. when I pointed out Ukrainians maybe able to arrest Russian advances and harass salients but have essentially zero chance of pushing the Russians out of Southern Ukraine without heavy weapons.

    It's just a true fact it turns out, even according to pro-Ukrainians ... so how was I anti-Ukrainian for posting it out and expounding the reasons for it in March 2022?
  • Jabberwock
    334
    Anyone who knows anything about Russian history and then considers this situation where literal Nazis, both proud and openly advocating the destruction of Russia, are shelling ethnic-Russian civilians in the Donbas for 8 years, would not conclude that the Russians would be unmotivated to teach these Nazis a lesson in proper estimation of an opponents strength.boethius

    Anyone who knows anything about Russian history (that one made me laugh out loud!) knows perfectly well that there are quite a few people branding Nazi symbols in Russia as well, in nationalistic circles quite close to Kremlin in particular. Dmitry Utkin, i.e. 'Wagner', the guy who has organized the Wagner Group, the essential part of the Russian forces in Ukraine, had Nazi tattoos, was photographed with Nazi symbols and Nazi paraphernalia, just like many of his collaborators, had German nicknames etc. The Rusich Group, another quite important nationalistic group, also openly displays Nazi or neo-Nazi symbols. There was a bit of commotion when video was released with Pushilin giving medals to LNR fighters and it turned out one of them had sewn-on Nazi symbols on his uniforms... How about the Base, the neo-Nazi group, that is run from Russia most likely with the state financing? Or Russkii Obraz, another neo-Nazi group with likely support from Kremlin...

    Also, one should not overlook the fact that the Jewish Council in Ukraine fully supports Ukrainian defenders, including Azov. On the other hand, the chief rabbi of Moscow had to emigrate from Russia, because he refused to support the war... Or one can mention that anti-Semitic rhetoric is regularly presented in Russian propaganda media, even though many of the propagandists (like Solovyov) are Jews themselves and oppose this. Or point out to the near-pogrom in Makhachkala...

    So, if you go for the simplistic interpretation, you have to conclude that in Ukraine Nazis are fighting Nazis. Or you need to actually get deeper into this and see it is a bit more complicated than that.
  • neomac
    1.4k
    Yes, I do have a problem with that. I am trying to understand the conflict, not cheerleading for a side.Tzeentch

    Again easy to retort. You are cheerleading Ukrainian surrender to Russian demands.

    positions that get hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians killed and do not accomplish the war aims, is not pro-Ukrainian.boethius

    Well that presupposes that you know what is pro-Ukrainian, but who the fuck are you to tell what is pro-Ukrainian?! BTW positions that get tens of thousands of Palestianis killed and do not accomplish the war aims, is not pro-Palestianian, right?
  • boethius
    2.4k
    Anyone who knows anything about Russian history (that one made me laugh out loud!) knows perfectly well that there are quite a few people branding Nazi symbols in Russia as well, in nationalistic circles quite close to Kremlin in particular.Jabberwock

    Complete false symmetry.

    What you describe is called actual cherry picking (what the people complaining about Ukrainian Nazi's were accused of, that of course among "tough guys" you're going find the odd Totenkopf or two and maybe even a Swastika).

    Wagner is recruiting hardened criminals from prison.

    What the reporters reveal in the videos I posted (did you watch them?) are organizations with a sophisticated Nazi ideology, not just a few "tough guys" with some tough symbols.

    So on the substance, unless you can provide more than some cherry picked tough guys with tough tattoos to signal their toughness, it is simply false to say Naziism is as popular and influential in Russia as it is in Ukraine, as tolerated in Russia as it is in Ukraine.

    Are there parades of torch holders with pictures of Nazi collaborators in Moscow, or are there?

    On the substance, you are simply wrong, but feel free to provide comparable evidence as the series of videos I posted (all by reputable Western news organizations).

    Now, on the point you are responding to, my point is exactly that Putin can make a simplistic argument!

    Doesn't matter how complicated you think it is, a lot of Russians will be sympathetic to Putins justification they are fighting Nazi's in Ukraine. You're saying regular Russians hold your view that it's more complicated, that of course Russia has just as many Nazi's?

    Think about it, obviously not.

    I focus on the symbolism these groups use in that statement just because that's what will be used by Putin to communicate this to the public. I specifically explain that this factual based motivation is going to be even stronger with propaganda.

    You just said you wanted to understand the war:

    Yes, I do have a problem with that. I am trying to understand the conflict, not cheerleading for a side.Tzeentch

    Well evaluating Russian motivation is part of understanding the war.

    We were sold on the idea that Russian soldiers and society were poorly motivated and so would collapse and that was an essential advantage of the Ukrainians.

    "Nazis in Ukraine is baseless Kremlin propaganda!" is the common refrain to the subject of the nominal purposes of the war "denazification".

    Or you need to actually get deeper into this and see it is a bit more complicated than that.Jabberwock

    My argument is that Nazis in Ukraine is an easy motivator for Russians.

    As for just-war clearly Russia has arguments there war is just, my position on the matter is that it is not obvious and I don't accept "pro-Ukrainians" here simply stating the just-warness for Ukrainian fighting is "obvious".

    The issue doesn't matter to me as I'm already a war skeptic and my compatriots are difficult to imagine more pro war, and my position is that it's immoral to send arms and not soldiers.

    I am for the path that minimizes suffering.

    If NATO sent soldiers and ended the war that way (ideally before the war happened) and avoided nuclear escalation and so on and "stood up" to Putin and talked his "language of strength" I'd be all for it.

    My position would be that NATO may have done bad things in the Middle East, but at least they avoided this particular war from happening.

    Obviously at no point was NATO even contemplating sending troops to Ukraine to stop anything but using Ukrainians for their own purposes, a policy I'm against.

    "Is Ukraine's war against the Donbas justified?" and "is Russia's invasion of Ukraine justified?" and "is Ukraine attempting to regain the lost territory justified given the risks and the costs" are all questions that would be relevant to me personally if NATO was sending troops, which is obviously not going to happen.

    The position of "Ukraine is righteous!!!!! .... but ... we don't want to escalate" is obviously a recipe to have Ukraine destroyed and attempt to maximize suffering. As "escalation" is code for "Russia losing on the battlefield".
  • boethius
    2.4k
    Well that presupposes that you know what is pro-Ukrainian. BTW positions that get hundreds of thousands of Palestianis killed and do not accomplish the war aims, is not pro-Palestianian, right?neomac

    Go on, explain how hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians dying for war aims that are not accomplished and seems clear to everyone now was completely obvious to everyone all along that the war aims wouldn't be accomplished with the means supplied ... is "pro-Ukrainian"?

    BTW positions that get hundreds of thousands of Palestianis killed and do not accomplish the war aims, is not pro-Palestianian, right?neomac

    I have no problem saying that if the war aims are not accomplished at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives, knowing the disastrous result ahead of time was guaranteed, positions that supported such a military disaster are not "pro-Palestinian".

    However, if you want to talk about Hamas here, I am not in favour of terrorism: Palestinian terrorism nor Israeli terrorism, as terrorism frustrates legitimate political process and the mutual cycle of terrorism in Israel and the occupied territories demonstrates exactly why terrorism is so toxic to solving things through dialogue.

    Fortunately, Hamas is competent and savvy enough to avoid a path that gets hundreds of thousands of Palestinians killed, only mere tens of thousands.

    More importantly, likely Hamas has achieved its war aims of demonstrating to the Arab world that Israel can be humiliated on the battlefield, this will motivate additional fanaticism for decades to come.

    With enough irregular forces with enough asymmetric assets borne from modern technology, irregular forces that can't practically be deterred with nuclear weapons, there very well may come the day when the IDF loses to a ragtag collection of groups originally created, trained, financed and incubated in the wars of the US.

    It seems that the exchange of violence in this war disfavours the Palestinians, but that isn't their calculus. Hamas killed a meaningful percentage of the total Israeli population, whereas Israel has killed a meaningless percentage of the total Muslim population, of which, along with Israeli merciless reprisal and the anger that fuels, the other aim of the operation is to rekindle the dream of a Muslim-Isreali war (or then at least enough Muslims to raise enough funds to attract enough jihadists to the holy land to give the IDF a run for its money).

    As a racist and genocidal group, I do not support Hamas, but their strategy does make sense.
  • Jabberwock
    334
    Wagner is recruiting hardened criminals from prison.boethius

    Anyone knowing even a bit of Russian history (and from this post it is very clear that it is not you) knows that before Wagner Group started recruiting prisoners, it was an elite PMC who was very strict about its recruiting. I was talking about WAGNER, you know, like in WAGNER Group, i.e. its founder. He is not a random guy from prison, he is a guy who (along with Prigozhin), used his elite troops to medle in various conflicts around the world, with the blessing and financing from Kremlin. And it just happens so that most of the closest command circle of that group comes from ultra-right nationalist groups, like Russian Imperial Movement. The same goes for the mentioned Rusich Group - these are not some random guys with svastikas, but members of well-trained paramilitary group comprising of far-right nationalists, also most likely funded by Kremlin, or for Russkii Obraz. I have given all those names for you on a plate, all you needed to do was to look them up instead of embarass yourself with cries of false symmetry, which just shows how out of depth you are when you are discussing such topics.

    Putin since his second term have been coveting support from Russian nationalists (I have given tons of links with my exchange with Mikie). It happens so that many of the 'mainstream' (if you can call them that) nationalists have close relations with definitely-not-mainstream far-right nationaiists many of whom are neo-Nazi. They have been pampered, supported and financed by Putin for his political gain.

    Here, some more reading for you:
    https://www.latrobe.edu.au/news/articles/2022/opinion/russias-long-history-of-neo-nazis

    Now, on the point you are responding to, my point is exactly that Putin can make a simplistic argument!

    Doesn't matter how complicated you think it is, a lot of Russians will be sympathetic to Putins justification they are fighting Nazi's in Ukraine. You're saying regular Russians hold your view that it's more complicated, that of course Russia has just as many Nazi's?

    Think about it, obviously not.

    I focus on the symbolism these groups use in that statement just because that's what will be used by Putin to communicate this to the public. I specifically explain that this factual based motivation is going to be even stronger with propaganda.
    boethius

    Lol. You clearly have no clue how propaganda in Russia works. I recommend watching some excerpts prepared by Julia Davis.
  • boethius
    2.4k
    Anyone knowing even a bit of Russian history (and from this post it is very clear that it is not you) knows that before Wagner Group started recruiting prisoners, it was an elite PMC who was very strict about its recruiting. I was talking about WAGNER, you know, like in WAGNER Group, i.e. its founder. He is not a random guy from prison, he is a guy who (along with Prigozhin), used his elite troops to medle in various conflicts around the world, with the blessing and financing from Kremlin.Jabberwock

    Yeah I get it, a real tough guy as tough as they come.

    One of the first arguments used to apologize for the Nazi's in Ukraine is that they are just tough guys and having some spooky SS symbolism is just boys will be boys kind of things, doesn't mean anything.

    The videos I posted clearly demonstrate the groups adoption of "Nazi stuff" is far deeper than just tattoos.

    However, if there wasn't evidence of organized groups who are happy to explain their "Aryans will rise again" ideology, then it's a fair complaint that you're going to find these sorts of tough guy tattoos on tough guys the world over, may not mean more than that.

    If your point is that Wagner is also a Nazi organization similar to Azov, you need that evidence you keep talking about.

    Now, if your point is that Wagner is a tool of the Kremlin to advance its state policies where violence is needed, seems legitimate political process to me. How is Wagner different from American PMC's?

    Putin since his second term have been coveting support from Russian nationalists (I have given tons of links with my exchange with Mikie). It happens so that many of the 'mainstream' (if you can call them that) nationalists have close relations with definitely-not-mainstream far-right nationaiists many of whom are neo-Nazi. They have been pampered, supported and financed by Putin for his political gain.Jabberwock

    Nationalists there definitely are in Ukraine. But please demonstrate there are groups that honour Nazi collaborators and are clearly organized around an explicitly Nazi ideology, not just have a few "bad apples". Now, if you want to say the nationalism is a different flavour, not explicitly Nazi, but just as bad, sure, I don't have a problem with that.

    Lol. You clearly have no clue how propaganda in Russia works. I recommend watching some excerpts prepared by Julia Davis.Jabberwock

    You're telling me that Putin calls the military campaign major objective "denazification" and that didn't play well in Russia.

    Normal Russians were just like "pfff, plenty of that over here, denazify Russia already".

    It's simply obvious fact that the Nazi groups that rose to positions of power and prominence (though not through legitimate electoral means) and openly talked about their desire to destroy Russia (I believe one slogan was "first Moscow, then Berlin!") does not help motivate the Russian population to get behind the war (which a large majority of Russians support).

    It's also an obvious fact that when you have fanatical groups willing to use "street politics" (what terrorism is called when white people do it) to kill opponents and intimidate everyone, murder a negotiator in a peace process, it both clouds political legitimacy and frustrates peace processes.

    Both points are essential to understanding the war: there are very motivated forces in Ukraine that do not want any peace and are willing to use violence to prevent peace, and those forces also provide some reasonable basis for regular Russians to support the war.

    Since we're on a philosophy forum and no one has actually detailed a just war argument for Ukraine, explaining how the separatists deserved to be shelled, etc. the Nazi's in Ukraine must also be touched on in a just-war theory for Ukraine. I keep on being told that the answer to this issue is there "is not enough Nazis in Ukraine", I ask "what would enough be?" and this question is never answered, but apparently just asking for a little expansion of the just war theory, to clarify a key term, is "pro Putin".

    However, this whole business of trying to prove there's "just as much Nazis in Russia" is completely absurd as it clearly accepts what the posted reporting shows, there's a Nazi problem in Ukraine.

    How is there being a Nazi problem in Russia, assuming that's true, justification to ignore the same problem in Ukraine? And if this is the case, why would we care about either?

    Is the logic here that we can support, train, arm and finance Nazis in Ukraine, that's justifiable and honours all the forebears who fought or resisted the Nazis, as long as Russia too has some Nazis?

    My position honestly doesn't seem to warrant any controversy at all, as a Canadian I don't want to see Canadian money and arms and training in the hands of Nazis. Indeed, there were laws passed to make sure the government wasn't inadvertently arming Nazis in Ukraine in support of the "legitimate government there" ... and a reporter goes and demonstrate exactly that is happening and ... nada.

    The West could have made a real tangible distinction between the Nazis and the Ukrainian government (which would have limited significantly the growth of the Nazi organization and the "street politics"; aka. terrorism) but the West doesn't, that's my main issue. And why does the West (as in Governments) not even try to distinguish between Nazis and not-Nazis in Ukraine? Because it's only the Nazis willing to shell civilians and keep the conflict going in the Donbas come what may!
  • Echarmion
    2.7k
    It's simply obvious fact that the Nazi groups that rose to positions of power and prominenceboethius

    What Nazi groups rose to positions of power and prominence?

    Because it's only the Nazis willing to shell civilians and keep the conflict going in the Donbas come what may!boethius

    Huh? So were the LNR and DNR troops shelling civilians on the Ukrainian side also Nazis?
  • neomac
    1.4k
    Go on, explain how hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians dying for war aims that are not accomplished and seems clear to everyone now was completely obvious to everyone all along that the war aims wouldn't be accomplished with the means supplied ... is "pro-Ukrainian”?boethius

    I already answered this question. Assessing military results depend on political aims. And political aims of national sovereign states are grounded on “national interest” which is identitarian matter. So it’s on the Ukrainians to establish to what extent it is worth fighting against the Russians. Besides until the Ukrainians want to fight and have the Western military support the war is not over. And if it will be over at some point without restoration of territorial integrity, there might be political ways to restore it (completely or in part) that wouldn’t have been possible without the Ukrainian war effort. For the US it took 20 years to leave Afghanistan.



    Fortunately, Hamas is competent and savvy enough to avoid a path that gets hundreds of thousands of Palestinians killed, only mere tens of thousands.boethius

    Tens of thousands over a population of roughly 2 millions is not that small either.
    Fortunately, Israel is competent and savvy that didn’t kill more Palestinians, even if it had the means to do it.

    More importantly, likely Hamas has achieved its war aims of demonstrating to the Arab world that Israel can be humiliated on the battlefield, this will motivate additional fanaticism for decades to come.boethius

    Hamas war ultimate aim is to liberation of Palestine, not to humiliate Israel on the battlefield. The latter is just one intermediary step.
    Ukraine liberated Kiev from Russian assault and humiliated Russia too, but still is far from liberating all its territories which is the ultimate aim of Ukraine. And also the Russian atrocities may motivate Ukrainians to fight Russia for decades to come.



    With enough irregular forces with enough asymmetric assets borne from modern technology, irregular forces that can't practically be deterred with nuclear weapons, there very well may come the day when the IDF loses to a ragtag collection of groups originally created, trained, financed and incubated in the wars of the US.boethius

    Maybe the Ukrainians could try to do the same then against the Russians.


    It seems that the exchange of violence in this war disfavours the Palestinians, but that isn't their calculus. Hamas killed a meaningful percentage of the total Israeli population, whereas Israel has killed a meaningless percentage of the total Muslim populationboethius

    The problem is that Hamas is not only an islamist but also a nationalist movement, so it doesn’t fight for all the muslisms but for the liberation of Palestine.
    While the other muslim regimes do not seem particularly compelled to retaliate against Israel (not even Iran) in a more direct or aggressive way. So Hamas calculation doesn’t seem to make more sense than what the Ukrainians are doing: both are far from reaching their ultimate goal, both have sacrificed a good deal of people wrt their population, both see this tragedy as a motivational factor to continue the battle.
  • jorndoe
    3.7k
    , if you went over the thread, I think you'd find that there's no denying that Ukraine has a slew of social problems, so don't put words in my mouth.

    The latest reiteration of plain lying (that I know of) from the Kremlin circle:

    Russia’s foreign minister faces Western critics at security meeting and walks out after speech
    — Konstantin Testorides, Derek Gatopoulos · AP · Nov 30, 2023
    ruling neo-Nazi regime in KyivSergey Lavrov
    Can you leave me alone, please? Thank you.Sergey Lavrov

    Shouldn't that be "Please leave the Ukrainians be"? When called out, they walk out. Their alternate world crap isn't working.

    No where do I claim Ukraine is ruled by a Nazi regime.boethius

    Goodie then, you don't defend/uphold the Kremlin's fabrication, glad to hear it. :up:

    Ukraine still isn't ruled by a Nazi regime; those claims are straight from the Kremlin's propaganda machine (don't echo them)
    [...]
    Apr 25, 2022 - Dec 20, 2022 - Aug 2, 2023
    Nov 28, 2023

    A fabrication they uphold as a rationale for their invasion (attempted landgrab). "DeNazification and demilitarization of Ukraine" — except not concerned with, say, Pavel Gubarev. (Or the late Utkin, or Rusich, ....) Quick to "throw bombs while living in a glass house" as it were. Introspection not their strong suit? Because it's a ruse with ulterior motives, propaganda for the gullible.

    I guess you're looking to justify their invasion by different means then — those creepy Ukrainian Nazis? (Doing Pesky's job, eh? :D) If given the chance, it might be interesting to see what'll happen, under the watchful eye of (peace-time) democracy.

    Ukrainians change for the better for exampleboethius

    There was a link, also posted prior on Oct 16, 2023; I guess I can post a more recent summary...
    Criterion               Jun 2023       Nov 2023
    Constitutional Court    Good progress  Completed
    Judicial governance     Completed      Completed
    Anti-corruption         Some progress  Some progress
    Anti-money laundering   Some progress  Completed
    De-oligarchisation      Some progress  Some progress
    Media legislation       Completed      Completed
    National minorities     Some progress  Some progress
    
    Incremental steps for democracy transparency freedom contra authoritarianism regress oppression (shedding the shackles of their dominant neighbor to the north, much to Putin's dismay). At least they're trying while getting shit all over.

    By the way,

    ↪boethius, the Kremlin gets their way, or it's the nuclear way...?Nov 9, 2023
  • Tzeentch
    3.8k
    Again easy to retort. You are cheerleading Ukrainian surrender to Russian demands.neomac

    No, I'm not. Quote me if you believe I'm saying that.

    Perhaps you take my cynical views of Washington's stake in this war as 'pro-Russian', but that's simply a mischaracterization.
  • boethius
    2.4k
    Goodie then, you don't defend/uphold the Kremlin's fabrication, glad to hear it.jorndoe

    Your claim was:

    ↪boethius, still going on about the Nazi stuff, eh? :)

    I guess I can re-repeat. Nah, Ukraine still isn't ruled by a Nazi regime; those claims are straight from the Kremlin's propaganda machine (don't echo them).
    jorndoe

    I point out that's a straw man, I do not claim Ukraine is ruled by a Nazi regime.

    No where do I claim Zelensky is a Nazi, and I wouldn't have a problem with the criteria that your leader needs to be a Nazi for the regime as a whole to be a Nazi; rather have pointed several times to Zelensky's inability to control the Nazis in Ukraine.

    I have zero problem believing Zelensky's promises to make peace with Russia in his election campaign was a genuine desire and intention on Zelensky's part. As much as I think Zelensky is a fool, I do not think he's foolish enough to actually want war with Ukraine.

    However, there is a powerful actor in Ukraine that did and does want war with Russia, which are the organized Nazi's and their mere "extremist white supremacist" affiliates.

    These Nazis represent a problem. In the recent discussion, the main point is that they are a problem that contribute to Russian motivation to prosecute the war. If you simply ignore the Nazi problem (as the Western media did immediately before and then during the war) then arguments like "Russia doesn't know how it's fighting and has low moral" seem plausible.

    The main reason for this total denialism of the Nazi problem, is that Nazis in Ukraine fighting Russian speakers, shelling Russian speaking civilians, overtly declaring their life style is one of warfare and their goal is a Great War with Russia, burning people in buildings and all sorts of other "street politics" (aka. terrorism), is an obvious provocation to Russia.

    For example, if I go around with a swastika arm band, someone punching me in the face is still assault, but it's obviously not unprovoked. You can't say it's a random act of violence. And even if you want to argue that the assault is illegal and so on, almost no one in Western society will have sympathy for me as a explicit Nazi intentionally provoking aggression towards me by people who don't like Nazis (we're assuming here I'm of sound mind and not going to a halloween party or act in a play or whatever).

    So if you want to keep the West behind the war then you need the Western media on board with the propaganda that there's no Nazis in Ukraine, oh ok there is but they're "everywhere" (as you put it), oh ok you got me they are a particular bad problem in Ukraine but they've reformed, all right all right they haven't reformed still Nazi as ever, but Russia has Nazis too!!"

    Now what is the Nazi problem in Ukraine?

    Since the question of Ukrainian perspectives was brought up, here's a Ukrainian perspective on the Nazi problem:
    Far-right Extremism as a Threat to Ukrainian Democracy.
    Far-right extremism represents a threat to the democratic development of Ukrainian society. The brief provides an overview of the activities and influence of the far right, differentiating between groups that express radical ideas but by and large operate within a democratic framework and extremist groups, which resort to violence to influence society.
    Vyacheslav Likhachev, Freedomhouse.org

    A key passage:

    During confrontations between right-wing groups and law enforcement bodies, the police show unacceptable passivity when it comes to preventing or suppressing unlawful activities, investigating incidents, and bringing perpetrators to justice. For example, the Svoboda party activists who threw grenades during a rally outside parliament in 2015, killing four national guardsmen, have not yet been convicted. One of the latest examples of the authorities’ tolerant attitude was on display in February 2018, during clashes in Kyiv following a hearing of a case involving Odessa’s mayor, Gennadiy Trukhanov. After the hearing, National Druzhina activists and members of other radical groups attacked police officers using gas cartridges and even firearms. The officers reacted rather passively; one activist, who shot and wounded a police officer, has yet to be taken into custody.Vyacheslav Likhachev, Freedomhouse.org

    Now, what would killing a national guardsmen with a grenade outside parliament or congress be called if it happened in the EU or United States?

    Terrorism.

    What would "activists" shooting and wounding police officers be called in the EU or United States of political messaging motives?

    Terrorism.

    Well, at least if brown people of whatever shade did it.

    This atmosphere has created favorable conditions for right-wing radicals and extremists, despite not being attractive as an electoral option. It has also left the state and society very vulnerable to their expansion. Radical groups no longer have to worry about societal or government reactions when it comes to recruiting members, they also face few restrictions when it comes to spreading their ideas. Effectively, they exist in an environment characterized by lack of accountability and impunity.Vyacheslav Likhachev, Freedomhouse.org

    Let's move onto NBC, a rare example in the Western Media that explains the Nazis in Ukraine are obviously a problem:

    Ukraine's Nazi problem is real, even if Putin's 'denazification' claim isn't

    But even though Putin is engaging in propaganda, it’s also true that Ukraine has a genuine Nazi problem — both past and present.
    NBC

    Obviously, the best propaganda is based on truth.

    Imagine if the US actually found some WMD's in Iraq, no matter if they were in terrible condition and basically forgotten or lost by the Iraqi forces (and in no way some imminent threat to the US as was claimed to justify preemptive warfare), the US would be parading those photos around to this day. The problem with the WMD propaganda was that it had no truth to it at all; it was not an exaggeration of some smaller but still concerning fact, but completely fabricated and so didn't stand the test of time.

    Likewise, imagine if Trump was not literally a Russian agent, but a pee tape did actually exist completely consensually and in save hands, just that Russia didn't have it and it remained zero evidence Trump colluded with the Russians. People would be going nuts. Indeed, the fact that members of Trumps administration did meet with Russian diplomats, there was at least some communication, was what fuelled Russia gate for years.

    Point is, that there is an actual Nazi problem in Ukraine makes the propaganda work of motivating Russians to support the war far easier, even if you personally believe, and is critical to understanding the war and critical to take into account in understanding Western policy.

    For example, if you're the US and actually want a war between Russia and Ukraine you would do nothing to stop the arming, funding and training of Nazis in Ukraine, and if your own country passes a law to make that illegal you just ignore that.

    Just as disturbing, neo-Nazis are part of some of Ukraine’s growing ranks of volunteer battalions. They are battle-hardened after waging some of the toughest street fighting against Moscow-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine following Putin’s Crimean invasion in 2014. One is the Azov Battalion, founded by an avowed white supremacist who claimed Ukraine’s national purpose was to rid the country of Jews and other inferior races. In 2018, the U.S. Congress stipulated that its aid to Ukraine couldn’t be used “to provide arms, training or other assistance to the Azov Battalion.” Even so, Azov is now an official member of the Ukraine National Guard.Ukraine's Nazi problem is real, NBC

    Not only will the Nazis in Ukraine themselves take the initiative to provoke Russia as much as possible, but those provocations and the fact they are Nazis gives strong reasons and motivations for Russia to escalate and a factual basis to amplify with propaganda to sustain a larger conflict.

    If one is interested in actual peace, obviously literal Nazi actors that have partial control over as well as free rein to terrorize to affect political decisions and processes, is worrisome.

    For example, one reason for Zelensky to reject the Russian's offer was certainly Boris Johnson pressuring him to do so, but another reason is certainly fear of reprisal from the Nazis who (as all these articles point out) have very little electoral success (so do not legitimate represent the majority of Ukrainians) but who can affect political process by direct violence, as this Atlantic Council article points out what the actual problem is:

    To be clear, far-right parties like Svoboda perform poorly in Ukraine’s polls and elections, and Ukrainians evince no desire to be ruled by them. But this argument is a bit of “red herring.” It’s not extremists’ electoral prospects that should concern Ukraine’s friends, but rather the state’s unwillingness or inability to confront violent groups and end their impunity. Whether this is due to a continuing sense of indebtedness to some of these groups for fighting the Russians or fear they might turn on the state itself, it’s a real problem and we do no service to Ukraine by sweeping it under the rug.Ukraine’s Got a Real Problem with Far-Right Violence, Atlantic Council

    Or as Washington Post describes the problem:

    For the most extreme among these neo-Nazis, the plan is even more sinister. They see Ukraine as a chance to further “accelerationist” agendas, which seek to speed up a civilization-wide collapse and then build fascist ethno-states from the ashes. This school of thought is demonstrated vividly by “Slovak,” whom we at SITE consider one of the most influential accelerationist neo-Nazi voices in the far right. On Feb. 25, Slovak announced that he was leaving an unknown country to fight in Ukraine. “This war is going to burn away the physical and moral weakness of our people, so that a strong nation may rise from the ashes,” he wrote. “Our job is to ensure that conditions remain terrible enough for long enough for this transformation to happen, and happen it must. Our future is at stake and we may not get another chance, certainly not one as good as this.”Neo-Nazis are exploiting Russia’s war in Ukraine for their own purposes, Washington Post

    Have the above sort of ideology by powerful factions Ukraine is not a good thing for any peace process.

    And not just a problem for Ukraine, but has wider implications for decades to come:

    The issue at hand is not a matter of validating or invalidating narratives, though. The issue is security — for Ukraine and for the countries these extremists come from.
    In many ways, the Ukraine situation reminds me of Syria in the early and middle years of the last decade. Just as the Syrian conflict served as a perfect breeding ground for groups like al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, similar conditions may be brewing in Ukraine for the far right. Syria became a plotting and training ground for terrorists to mount attacks in the West, such as the attacks in Paris in 2015 and in Brussels in 2016 attacks.

    The extremists who successfully make it to Ukraine could return home with new weapons and combat experience under their belts — or stay in Ukraine, where they can further influence their countrymen online.
    Neo-Nazis are exploiting Russia’s war in Ukraine for their own purposes, Washington Post

    So what can we conclude from actual facts.

    First, Ukraine has a Nazi problem.

    Second, Nazis are able to influence the political process with violence instead of electoral success.

    Third, the Nazis are powerful enough in Ukraine that they can commit clear acts of terrorism and face no consequences. They may not totally control the state, but they act with "impunity", so one step away of taking control of the state.

    Why all this matters, is not only in understanding events, but also is another "thorny", I believe is the word, issue in terms of Western policy.

    The first issue is when terrorist organizations can act with impunity and are fanatically devoted to further warfare, even if it reduces the country to "ashes" as some sort of purifying exercise, this factor in Ukrainian politics must be discounted in any justification for support for Ukraine; especially pressure to keep fighting rather than seek a peace deal. Since we know Ukrainian politics is affected by various Nazi projects through the threat of violence, we have to consider the possibility different more legitimate political actors are influenced by violent extortion.

    "That Ukrainians want to fight," for example to retake all the land including Crimea, is not in itself justification for supplying arms to support that cause but certainly a necessary requirement for (at least public) Western political discourse. If that objective is more a Nazi objective than anyone else's, and polls are not only manipulative as we've seen but people can be intimidated to give one answer over another, then the West shouldn't support it. Which doesn't exclude any support at all, but could lead to supporting a defensive posture and negotiations instead of trying to reconquer territory at a massive cost to Ukrainian lives and economy (and may also have no chance of working).

    Second policy problem is that even if one completed the complicated exercise of discounting Nazi influence on Ukrainian politics, certainly it would be important to any country that doesn't explicitly support fascism to make sure there are safeguards to prevent the grown (not just in Ukraine but internationally as seen above) of Naziism.

    For example, you might want to have mechanisms to track arms and money and a veto on which foreign fighters can openly travel to Ukraine who "see Ukraine as a chance to further 'accelerationist' agendas, which seek to speed up a civilization-wide collapse and then build fascist ethno-states from the ashes," rather than structure support to Ukraine as an untraceable slush fund, both in terms of finance and arms (except of course the money that never enters Ukraine but is transferred directly to arms manufacturers).
  • boethius
    2.4k
    ↪boethius, if you went over the thread, I think you'd find that there's no denying that Ukraine has a slew of social problems, so don't put words in my mouth.jorndoe

    Also, what's you're implication here, that all the Nazis in the videos I posted and the articles above are just another "social problem" like alcoholism, homelessness or child obesity?

    Is it a "social problem" or "alternate world type stuff". So hard to keep track.

    For anyone following:

    Step one is straight up denialism, any mention of the Nazis in Ukraine is derided as purely Kremlin invented propaganda.

    Faced with the evidence from Western sources that this is obviously not the case:

    Step two is to claim that there's no more Nazis in Ukraine than anywhere else, it's just totally normal background Naziism levels, or something like that.

    Again, faced with the evidence that is also not the case:

    Step three is to claim there there's also Nazis in Russia!!

    When this false symmetry is pointed out and also the obvious fact that even if true, that's not a justification to support Nazis in Ukraine; they'd just both have Nazis. What's even the argument, "we can have our Nazis if Russia has theirs?" Makes no sense and obviously presupposes there's a pretty bad Nazi problem in Ukraine if co-founders of Wagner also having Nazis tattoos and German nicknames (which is not enough evidence to constitute a Nazi ideology) is needed to desperately try to make the case that Russia is basically a Nazi regime too!!

    Step four is to admit there is Nazis (not "alternative world stuff" after all) and admit they represent a pretty dangerous extremist problem, just that saying the whole regime in Kiev is Nazi is a ever so slight exaggeration Russian propaganda has made.

    If the war goes badly (for Western policy and geopolitical strategy; obviously Ukrainians don't matter much to us) and also serves as the predicted breeding ground for far-right extremism mentioned above, the West may come to regret doing absolutely nothing about things like:

    Another frequent honoree is Roman Shukhevych, revered as a Ukrainian freedom fighter but also the leader of a feared Nazi auxiliary police unit that the Forward notes was “responsible for butchering thousands of Jews and … Poles.” Statues have also been raised for Yaroslav Stetsko, a one-time chair of the OUN, who wrote “I insist on the extermination of the Jews in Ukraine.”NBC

    If there's a literal Nazi coup, which is not out of the cards, and an overt Nazi regime comes to power, it will suddenly be "OMG, what is happening, how did we ignore the Nazi problem".

    Which is something, @Tzeentch, you should easily understand the relevance of, having already pointed out that proxies have a tendency to go out of control.

    The West assumes Ukrainian democracy is going to survive the war. That is not certain.

    The West has a lot of leverage in that Western money is needed to avoid terrible suffering in Ukraine, but fanatical extremists may not care about that. Russia has no intention of conquering the West of Ukraine, as you've likewise pointed out, so one potential end result is that if the war is lost for East Ukraine, the fanatical Nazi elements seize control of power in the West, Russians take what they want in Eastern Ukraine and then there is an actual frozen conflict, and some sort of dystopian nightmare unfolds in West Ukraine.

    From what I understand, the CIA-neocons genuinely thought letting the Nazi problem grow wouldn't be "their problem" but Russias problem, be that insurgency they loved talking about. But if Russia doesn't conquer all of Ukraine then it will remain a Western problem.

    And what can the West do about it if the worst elements in Ukraine come to power? Intervene militarily to avoid appeasement?
  • Echarmion
    2.7k
    Point is, that there is an actual Nazi problem in Ukraine makes the propaganda work of motivating Russians to support the war far easier, even if you personally believe, and is critical to understanding the war and critical to take into account in understanding Western policy.

    For example, if you're the US and actually want a war between Russia and Ukraine you would do nothing to stop the arming, funding and training of Nazis in Ukraine, and if your own country passes a law to make that illegal you just ignore that.
    boethius

    You're making an unwarranted leap here from arguing that Ukraine's Nazi problem is beneficial to Russian propaganda efforts to concluding that it was actually a reason for the russian government to invade.

    partial control over as well as free rein to terrorize to affect political decisions and processes, is worrisome.boethius

    What does it mean that it is "worrisome"? What exactly is the worry?

    another reason is certainly fear of reprisal from the Nazisboethius

    Certainly? No. You have no grounds to conclude that.

    Second, Nazis are able to influence the political process with violence instead of electoral success.boethius

    As far as I can see, you have not provided a single example of them actually influencing a political process with violence.

    Third, the Nazis are powerful enough in Ukraine that they can commit clear acts of terrorism and face no consequences. They may not totally control the state, but they act with "impunity", so one step away of taking control of the state.boethius

    No, it is not one step away from controlling the state. This is ridiculous nonsense.

    Since we know Ukrainian politics is affected by various Nazi projects through the threat of violence, we have to consider the possibility different more legitimate political actors are influenced by violent extortion.boethius

    And we're in the realm of just baselessly spinning your narrative where you want it.

    and polls are not only manipulative as we've seen but people can be intimidated to give one answer over another,boethius

    And some more fantasy piled on top. You just can't help but venture forth into the ridiculous, apparently.

    make the case that Russia is basically a Nazi regime too!!boethius

    An interesting slip, given you just claimed that you're not arguing that Ukraine is a nazi regime.

    just that saying the whole regime in Kiev is Nazi is a ever so slight exaggeration Russian propaganda has made.boethius

    This consistent effort to lie, manipulate and distort is really tiresome. You claim one thing, then a few paragraphs later you're already backtracking, as if you're somehow unable to go through even one post without dialing up your claims again.

    Case in point:

    If there's a literal Nazi coup, which is not out of the cardsboethius

    So we went from "there's a Nazi problem in Ukraine that strengthens russian propaganda" to "Ukraine is only one step away from a Nazi regime and a Nazi regime might actually pop up at any time".

    Needless to say that the latter claim barely even qualifies as a slippery slope fallacy.
  • boethius
    2.4k
    You're making an unwarranted leap here from arguing that Ukraine's Nazi problem is beneficial to Russian propaganda efforts to concluding that it was actually a reason for the russian government to invade.Echarmion

    It is actually "a reason", if the the Nazis help the invasion of Ukraine by providing both legitimate motivation (we don't like Nazis) as well as plenty of propaganda opportunity to amplify the threat of Nazis, that is "a reason" to invade, that he Ukrainians, at minimum, make the task easier of motivating your own society.

    I have no problem with NATO enlargement being the main reason, but why Putin leads with "denazification" is because the NATO threat is very abstract. Now that NATO has sent NATO tanks into Ukraine and Russia is fighting NATO heavy weapons, it's more easy to sell that the conflict is actually with NATO so you see Russian rhetoric shifting in that direction the more NATO weapons arrive in Ukraine.

    Now, the Nazis in Ukraine are also a legitimate security threat to Russia and are shelling the separatists (a situation that is not sustainable anyways). These are facts. A just war theory would need to navigate these facts and demonstrate that the separatists deserved to be attacked and shell (Ukraine's war on the separatists had just cause) as well as the Nazis are a threat but not "enough" of a threat for Russia to justify preemptive war.

    No one's done, in the hundreds of pages that @ssu bemoaning (which the primary reason is the war continues, so too the discussion), the work of actually producing a just war theory for Ukraine, even less for the aims of reconquering all the territory and Crimea at heavy cost and little chance of success.

    People, such as yourself, simply claim it's obvious ... while also claiming separatists are a thorny issue and that it was obvious to anyone who can read that Ukraine cannot possible prevail with NATO's level of support, that plenty of analysis was available that would make that clear.

    Since I don't support NATO's policy even assuming Ukraine has just cause, the issue isn't so important to me and I don't have time to get into all the historical details to be "be sure" who has just cause, if anyone, in this conflict. I just don't see how it's obvious. In particular, I don't see how Russias war on Ukraine isn't justified if the US and NATO's various wars are, so I have particular issue with "it's ok when US does it because US hegemony is the bomb"; I don't have much issue with condemning both the US and Russia's imperial wars (although that doesn't resolve the issue of the Donbas).

    What does it mean that it is "worrisome"? What exactly is the worry?Echarmion

    You honestly don't find the statement, assuming it's true, that Nazis with "partial control over as well as free rein to terrorize to affect political decisions and processes" worrisome?

    If Ukrainian Nazis are murdering and intimidating for political purposes in Ukraine, that wouldn't worry you?

    Certainly? No. You have no grounds to conclude that.Echarmion

    You'd have to be a moron to not have any fear of reprisal if you make peace and radical Nazi groups and affiliates disapprove of that, going so far as to murder a negotiator (negotiating on your behalf, you trust enough to send to talk to the Russians) to make the point. You'd have to be a moron to take at face value the reason for the murder was the negotiator was a traitor without evidence.

    Now, if you really think Zelensky is that much of a clueless moron, feel free to state it clearly. Even I give Zelensky more credit.

    As far as I can see, you have not provided a single example of them actually influencing a political process with violence.Echarmion

    Watch the videos and read the articles.

    If people can murder their political opponents as well as agents of the state without consequence that will influence things.

    And some more fantasy piled on top. You just can't help but venture forth into the ridiculous, apparently.Echarmion

    It's not at all ridiculous. There can be severe consequences from the security state for anyone who disapproves of the war, so if some stranger phones you up asking what you think about, you may answer more out of intimidation than freely (and this is ignoring the fact the questions are clearly manipulative).

    No, it is not one step away from controlling the state. This is ridiculous nonsense.Echarmion

    Once you achieve enough military power that the state no longer applies to law to you (law enforcement are either on your side or too afraid to do anything), you are one step away from taking power. You maybe a minority of the electorate but you may have a majority of the weapons and people willing to use them.

    In fact, one reason that you would want to the war to continue even if you know it is lost is so that the Russians destroy the Ukrainian regulars that could protect the state from a violent coup.

    And we're in the realm of just baselessly spinning your narrative where you want it.Echarmion

    Again, read the articles. If you just ignore the evidence presented that Ukraine Nazis are unaccountable and act with impunity, or then believe people with that kind of power can't affect people's decisions, you're just a willfully ignorant fool at this point.

    Feel free to engage with the evidence posted. But if it's all just "Russian propaganda" produced by Western journalists, I guess feel free to believe that.

    An interesting slip, given you just claimed that you're not arguing that Ukraine is a nazi regime.Echarmion

    This is a paraphrase of the Nazi apologist position, here and elsewhere. If it's not quite exact, then feel free to interpret as Russia has the same Nazi problem as Ukraine. The main point in pushing the symmetry even to the extreme, is how would it matter? How does Russian Naziism, assuming it's as rampant as Ukrainian, justify supporting Ukrainian Nazis?

    This consistent effort to lie, manipulate and distort is really tiresome. You claim one thing, then a few paragraphs later you're already backtracking, as if you're somehow unable to go through even one post without dialing up your claims again.

    Case in point:
    Echarmion

    My position is Zelensky is not a Nazi but that Nazis at this point basically control everything that matters in Ukraine, such as the police state. So it's a slight distance away from a Nazi coup.

    So we went from "there's a Nazi problem in Ukraine that strengthens russian propaganda" to "Ukraine is only one step away from a Nazi regime and a Nazi regime might actually pop up at any time".Echarmion

    Because we're not talking in some timeless vacuum of eternal abstract concepts.

    In 2022, before the war, there were strong Nazi battalions that could act with impunity and unaccountability already, but they were small compared to the electorate and the regular Ukrainian army, so they did not have the power to stage a coup.

    From 2014 to 2022 the Nazis main affect on history is keeping the war in the Donbas going, shelling civilians and being generally provocative, and frustrating any peace process. I would categorize them as a danger to Ukrainian democracy and clearly an obstacle to peace.

    But they did not have the power before the war to just stage a violent coup.

    Now, since the war, they grow exceptionally more powerful within the Ukrainian state but, more importantly, Ukrainian regulars are being destroyed.

    If the process continues, at some point (which could exist even now) there would be no way for the Ukrainian state to resist a violent coup.

    Needless to say that the latter claim barely even qualifies as a slippery slope fallacy.Echarmion

    A slippery slope fallacy requires an end-point that is either absurd or the proposer of the alleged fallacy anyways rejects. For example, that homosexual rights (broadening the scope of legal sexuality) will lead to legalizing beastiality and pedophilia, is a classic slippery slope fallacy.

    A violent coup by an extremist group is in no way an absurd end point to the slippery slope that "can't happen". Has happened plenty of times in History.

    I also don't anyways reject that it can happen.

    It definitely can. I'm not predicting it (we don't have enough information of the various factions in Ukraine and their relative strength to make accurate predictions for this sort of thing), but it is definitely "in the cards", as I say.

    It wouldn't be good for Ukraine obviously, and ruin further the economy, and would make further Western support reduce or stop entirely, but the groups in question would not care about that.

    Right now the Nazis and other extremists who want the war to continue as long as possible (for example to "purify" society and amass as many weapons and funds as possible) need Zelensky to keep the money and arms flowing.

    What I will predict is that as soon as the money and arms stop flowing, these groups would turn on Zelensky. I also predict that they'd also turn on him if he about faced and wanted to make peace with the Russians.

    They may not, however, stage a violent coup even if they were capable. They may see the reason to not kill the goose the lays the golden egg.

    What seems clear is that factionalism is rising between the major power blocks in Ukraine, Azov and the Nazis being one power block.

    Understanding the war, its origins and causes, requires understanding this Nazi power block and its influence in Ukraine as well as provocative affect on Russia (that is both legitimate as well as ripe for cynical exploitation).

    The war has greatly amplified all the "street politics" (aka. terrorism) trends that existed before the war.

    It is an important factor to consider.

    For example, if Nazis now have enough military and police power to simply take over the state, then they could leverage that to keep the war going to essentially extort the West. Obviously an actual Nazi coup in Ukraine would be a PR disaster for all the politicians and officials who have championed the war, so hardliners in Ukraine can hold that over NATO and to keep the money and the arms flowing.

    Which would be my guess that they'd use their power for (and even if it's not clear they could take over, the threat needs to be considered) at this stage in the war.

    As I say, it's a problem. Nazis aren't the only actor in Ukraine and in the conflict, but they are a significant force with their own agenda and have means to try to bring it about.
  • Jabberwock
    334
    Nationalists there definitely are in Ukraine. But please demonstrate there are groups that honour Nazi collaborators and are clearly organized around an explicitly Nazi ideology, not just have a few "bad apples". Now, if you want to say the nationalism is a different flavour, not explicitly Nazi, but just as bad, sure, I don't have a problem with that.boethius

    Great, so we agree that nationalists inciting genocide are equally bad, no matter whether they explicitly invoke Nazi symbols or not. So we can include Krasovsky, Norkin, Gubarev (and here), Medvedev and dozens of others, too many to list them, because they are doing that every week if not every day. We can list such groups like the mentioned Rusich, Club of Angry Patriots, Russian Imperial Movement and quite a few of others. So if we consider extreme nationalisms in general, then yes, it is a false symmetry, because in Russia they are much closer to the government and their rhetoric is practically mainstream there.

    Yes, nationalism plays an enormous role in the causes for the war. The Russian one.
  • boethius
    2.4k


    This is what pretty much all the realist analysts, such as Mearsheimer, have been predicting, that Russia would not at this stage negotiate peace even if the West wanted to.

    Ukraine is on the back foot having burned up a large part of its reserve "NATO trained" battalions in the counter offensive, is behind on mobilization (so they've passed a law allowing foreign bounty hunters to operate in Ukraine and catch draft dodgers) and even if they catch up draftees need to be trained and the quality of draftees is also starting to be a serious problem.

    To make matters worse for Ukraine, the US supplied Ukraine with cluster munitions because they "ran out" of normal shells, and this has unlocked the Russians use of cluster munitions on a large scale; especially cluster bombs which are way bigger than cluster shells. Maybe Russia would have started using cluster munitions at scale anyways, but the fact US supplied them has meant little PR consequence to Russia for their use.

    Ukraine's air power is severely attritted and the F16 program, if it ever happens, could be literally years away from being fully effective (a lot needs to be done to make that a thing).

    New chaos in the Middle East puts pressure on further ammunition support as well.

    So for all these reason, Russia is extremely likely to press their advantages.
  • boethius
    2.4k
    Great, so we agree that nationalists inciting genocide are equally bad, no matter whether they explicitly invoke Nazi symbols or not.Jabberwock

    I don't have a problem with that. I have no problem with characterizing Russia as an imperial state with a very strong nationalist block.

    I have a problem of using nationalism in Russia to excuse nationalism in Ukraine.

    I have a problem with supporting a war strategy that has essentially no chance of succeeding at an extremely high cost to trying.

    I have a problem of turning Russian critique into some moral imperative to arm the Ukrainians while pressuring them to reject peace, even if the war is a terrible disaster.

    I have a problem of rejecting a reasonable peace proposal when Ukraine had the most leverage to get as many concessions as possible, on the basis of "no guarantee". Is winning the war guaranteed? Is NATO delivering "everything Ukraine needs" guaranteed?

    Now that Ukraine has very little leverage, surprise, surprise, Imperialist Russia isn't interested in a truce anymore.

    Russia has now already paid the major costs of the war and passed the major risk points, so continuing the war is now far wore for NATO than it is for Russia. NATO's diplomatic and sanctions quiver empty, there's not much incentive for Russia to not take more land and also try to push Ukraine into a failed state status that becomes the EU's problem to deal with (obviously the US will gracefully take their leave of the situation if and when that happens).
  • boethius
    2.4k
    Yes, nationalism plays an enormous role in the causes for the war. The Russian one.Jabberwock

    Again, watch the videos, read the articles if the topic interests you.

    Ukrainian nationalism is a major factor in 2014 and what has happened since. The West largely ignores this factor because "meh, they're fighting Russians".
  • Jabberwock
    334
    I don't have a problem with that. I have no problem with characterizing Russia as an imperial state with a very strong nationalist block.

    I have a problem of using nationalism in Russia to excuse nationalism in Ukraine.
    boethius

    It is not an excuse, but an explanation. Ukrainian nationalism is a direct response to growing Russian nationalism. A big neighbor with the president openly denying your nationality and statehood and courting extreme nationalistic/imperial movements might have an effect like that. Sure, Ukraine could do more to curtail that, but it does not change the fact that it is Russia that wants to subjugate Ukraine, not the other way round. Girkin himself stated that the separatist movements in Donbas were rather anemic. If Russia did not stir up the trouble, Ukrainian nationalism would not be a factor at all.
  • neomac
    1.4k
    Again easy to retort. You are cheerleading Ukrainian surrender to Russian demands. — neomac


    No, I'm not. Quote me if you believe I'm saying that.

    Perhaps you take my cynical views of Washington's stake in this war as 'pro-Russian', but that's simply a mischaracterization.
    Tzeentch

    I don’t believe you said that. I believe you mean that. Indeed, if these are your assumptions:
    1. You believe that state do not have the right to fight in self-defence [1]
    2. You believe that Russia succeeded in its military goals (faint around Kiev and securing land bridge in the south) and Ukraine failed (it didn’t free the annexed territories)
    3. That the US support (followed by weak European leaders) is cynically exploitative. And that “If anything I believe the Europeans should stop backing the war in Ukraine and encourage the Americans to leave as fast as possible.”
    4. You keep repeating that in March Ukraine had the best chance to end the war and that Ukraine should negotiate regardless of the broken trust.

    The argument you are pushing is something like Ukrainians have no points:
    - in fighting in self-defence of their country,
    - in pursuing a military victory over Russia because Russia has won on the battlefield and Ukrainian objectives are unattainable
    - in relying to the US military support (either because the US is exploitative or because if it wasn’t it should stop supporting Ukraine anyways)
    But Ukraine should try to negotiate anyways despite the lack of trust from the Russians, at least at the conditions of March / April 2022 (which equates to a negotiation for surrender if there are no security guarantees from other countries, which ones? The exploitative US won’t give them and it can not be trusted anyways), if Russia accepts it (what if Russia wants more?) [2][3]. So practically without leverage (which was the American military support and willingness to keep fighting), with the priority to spare “many thousands of lives and billions in damages”, and with no territorial concessions nor security guarantees.
    If that is not “surrender”, I don’t know what is.

    But let’s have a look at how you argue when Russia is not the aggressor [4]. No argument to support the idea that Palestinians have no right to fight to defend their idea of state, that freeing Palestine with a war is unattainable and Israel is winning by grabbing and securing more land, that Iran is exploiting Palestinians (and other hegemonically ambitious players too in the Arab world and outside), and that Palestinians should negotiate with Israel with the peace deal on terms that Israel is willing to accept. It’s all about what Israel should do.



    [1]
    ↪javra
    I agree that there is such a thing as self-defense. I just don't think it applies to war in general because what is actually being defended is not a person, but an idea of a state, territory, national pride, etc.
    Tzeentch

    [2]
    Right now it will be very difficult to come to a peace agreement, since trust between Russia and the West has been completely shattered (it should be attempted regardless).Tzeentch

    [3]
    When peace talks were started in late March, that should have been the end of the war.Tzeentch

    How far should the situation in Ukraine deterioriate before we can agree the peace accords that were on the table in March / April 2022, scarcely a month into the war, should have been carried out instead of blocked by the US?

    Those were blocked by the US simply to save Washington's ego. Flipping Ukraine pro-western has been a decades-long project of the Neocon foreign policy blob, under leadership of chief blob Nuland.

    How many thousands of lives and billions in damages is Washington's ego worth?
    Tzeentch

    [4]
    Israel should stop illegally occupying Gaza and the West Bank. That's an action that it can and should undertake unilaterally.Tzeentch
    They should stop illegally occupying Gaza and the West Bank, and stop committing human rights violations, war crimes and crimes against humanity. As long as Israel is the occupier and refuses to carry out the relevant UN resolutions, Israel is the problem.Tzeentch
  • Echarmion
    2.7k
    Now, the Nazis in Ukraine are also a legitimate security threatboethius

    No they are not, unless you mean in the sense that any armed Ukrainian is a threat to russian interests in Ukraine.

    These are facts. A just war theory would need to navigate these facts and demonstrate that the separatists deserved to be attacked and shell (Ukraine's war on the separatists had just cause)boethius

    Not really, since that is merely a civil war and thus an internal affair.

    as well as the Nazis are a threat but not "enough" of a threat for Russia to justify preemptive war.boethius

    There is no justifiable "preemptive war" under international law. But, if there was some moral case for it, we would need to identify either an existential threat to Russia as a state or some grave threat to russian citizen. Like weapons of mass destruction being held in preparation for their use on russian cities.

    This is not the case, and so there is not remotely any justification for a "preemptive war".

    If Ukrainian Nazis are murdering and intimidating for political purposes in Ukraine, that wouldn't worry you?boethius

    What worries me personally is immaterial.

    You'd have to be a moron to not have any fear of reprisal if you make peace and radical Nazi groups and affiliates disapprove of that, going so far as to murder a negotiator (negotiating on your behalf, you trust enough to send to talk to the Russians) to make the point. You'd have to be a moron to take at face value the reason for the murder was the negotiator was a traitor without evidence.

    Now, if you really think Zelensky is that much of a clueless moron, feel free to state it clearly. Even I give Zelensky more credit.
    boethius

    This is just baseless speculation on Zekensky's motives.

    If people can murder their political opponents as well as agents of the state without consequence that will influence things.boethius

    So you cannot actually provide any specific example.

    Once you achieve enough military power that the state no longer applies to law to you (law enforcement are either on your side or too afraid to do anything), you are one step away from taking power.boethius

    But that is not the case.

    Again, read the articles. If you just ignore the evidence presented that Ukraine Nazis are unaccountable and act with impunity, or then believe people with that kind of power can't affect people's decisionsboethius

    Speculative generalities are not a replacement for an argument.

    This is a paraphrase of the Nazi apologist position, here and elsewhere. If it's not quite exact, then feel free to interpret as Russia has the same Nazi problem as Ukraine. The main point in pushing the symmetry even to the extreme, is how would it matter?boethius

    It would matter if someone were to argue that Russia is worried about Nazi ideology in Ukraine and felt compelled to start a preemptive war to stop them. Because that would be a rather absurd thing to do if russian Nazis then simply replaced the Ukrainian ones.

    How does Russian Naziism, assuming it's as rampant as Ukrainian, justify supporting Ukrainian Nazis?boethius

    Strawman.

    My position is Zelensky is not a Nazi but that Nazis at this point basically control everything that matters in Ukraine, such as the police state. So it's a slight distance away from a Nazi coup.boethius

    Yeah and that is utter bullshit. So obviously untrue that it can only be called a bold faced lie.

    Because we're not talking in some timeless vacuum of eternal abstract concepts.

    In 2022, before the war, there were strong Nazi battalions that could act with impunity and unaccountability already, but they were small compared to the electorate and the regular Ukrainian army, so they did not have the power to stage a coup.

    From 2014 to 2022 the Nazis main affect on history is keeping the war in the Donbas going, shelling civilians and being generally provocative, and frustrating any peace process. I would categorize them as a danger to Ukrainian democracy and clearly an obstacle to peace.

    But they did not have the power before the war to just stage a violent coup.

    Now, since the war, they grow exceptionally more powerful within the Ukrainian state but, more importantly, Ukrainian regulars are being destroyed.

    If the process continues, at some point (which could exist even now) there would be no way for the Ukrainian state to resist a violent coup.
    boethius

    This just goes from hyperbole in the first paragraph into absolute fantasy immediately.

    A slippery slope fallacy requires an end-point that is either absurd or the proposer of the alleged fallacy anyways rejects.boethius

    That is false. It's a slippery slope fallacy if it doesn't explain the intervening steps.

    It is an important factor to consider.boethius

    But not in a manner that merely uses the facts of the matter as a stepping stone into a wild flurry of fantasy and speculation.

    For example, if Nazis now have enough military and police power to simply take over the state, then they could leverage that to keep the war going to essentially extort the West. Obviously an actual Nazi coup in Ukraine would be a PR disaster for all the politicians and officials who have championed the war, so hardliners in Ukraine can hold that over NATO and to keep the money and the arms flowing.

    Which would be my guess that they'd use their power for (and even if it's not clear they could take over, the threat needs to be considered) at this stage in the war.

    As I say, it's a problem. Nazis aren't the only actor in Ukraine and in the conflict, but they are a significant force with their own agenda and have means to try to bring it about.
    boethius

    Yeah no. Obvious propaganda.
  • Tzeentch
    3.8k


    1. You believe that state do not have the right to fight in self-defence [1]neomac

    You're conflating two different discussions. From a moral standpoint I view states as being fundamentally flawed from the outset.

    But my engagement in the discussion about the Ukraine war has never been moral in nature. Morality isn't even a useful lens through which to view the conduct of states, since they are not moral actors.

    Ukraine has a right to defend itself from a standpoint of international law, which is something I would never deny.

    You have to pay attention to what is said, not fill in the blanks with what you would like to believe "I meant".


    As for the rest, I believe Ukraine will achieve nothing by continuing to fight, except for a worse bargaining position and further destruction of Ukraine.

    There's nothing 'pro-Russian' about that, even if it's not what cheerleaders want to hear.

    Yes, I believe Russia most-likely achieved its primary objectives. Yes, I believe the Ukrainiain bargaining position has only deteriorated since the negotiations of March/April 2022.

    And on the topic of trust; it's Ukraine who stands to lose most in this war, so trust or no trust, refusing negotiations will only deteriorate its position further.
  • jorndoe
    3.7k
    Your claim wasboethius

    Exactly. Hence, the Kremlin circle = serial liars (+ hypocrites). Dis/agree?

    I do not claim Ukraine is ruled by a Nazi regimeboethius

    Whether you do or not, the Kremlin circle does, and employs that as a rationale for their wretched warring, which hence falls flat. Yes? No?

    ‘There are no homosexuals in this country’ How Putin’s embrace of homophobia echoes dictators of the past
    — Vasily Legeido, Sam Breazeale · Meduza · Oct 21, 2022
    Top Russian court bans LGBT movement as 'extremist'
    — Mark Trevelyan, Kevin Liffey · Reuters · Nov 30, 2023

    Ukraine has made some progress, where Russia has regressed. Agree or not?

    (As an aside, check how many steps from this old post (Banno, 180 Proof) Pukin has accomplished.)

    So hard to keep trackboethius

    Especially with long weaving comments, eh? ;)

    By the way,

    ↪boethius, the Kremlin gets their way, or it's the nuclear way...?Nov 9, 2023

    FYI, reportedly, Ukraine has become the most littered area on the planet — littered with Russian mines, bombs, trip wires and traps, grenades, explosives in kitchen gear and toys, ...

    59vzlujcb7qwkixy.jpg
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.